Silent Screams

Is it truly ethical and just in the eyes of man and God for one gender to suffer with no remedy or any compensation, while the other can do as it pleases

Silent Screams

People usually experience two types of desires. A person is imbued with the first one at birth, and it does not decay until the person's demise. Taking it for granted can lead to severe and devastating consequences, leaving an individual's psyche shattered. For example, the desire to eat and drink is universal for all humans. These desires surface as urges within us, such as hunger and thirst.

The second type of desire arises from a person's environment and circumstances. For example, the greatest desire of a poor person might be to purchase a motorbike, while a person of modest means might desire a car — or a means to improve their life. These desires are not fatal and are rather arbitrary in nature.

There are no taboos or stigmas attached to fulfilling the first type of desire, the carnal urges. Man has been forced to cannibalise and consume beasts to satisfy his urge of hunger, and all social and religious clerics and scholars have justified it or viewed it empathetically. However, another hunger which originates from deep within one's being: the urge, the hunger for physical intimacy.
 
What if this hunger does not find a positive and legitimate outlet? And what if the acknowledgment of this hunger becomes a sin for a specific group, in accordance with the gender roles defined by society? 

Pakistan, a developing country, has been concealing the suffocating screams and cries of countless women who are starving, but they have been denied the right to feel this hunger. Women, who are at times thirstier than a desert, but cannot express their thirst, for it would be seen as unethical to even acknowledge this thirst.

Pakistan's cultural tapestry is deeply knitted through the fabric of archaic traditions and beliefs, and all of them are knitted through the religious perception of the people. This is exactly what makes the people so orthodox and unchangeable in regard to their traditions, for a No to cultural ethics, in their view, shall be a No to religious ethics. A country so poor in literacy that it is now trapped in an endless maze of its own concocted superstitions and norms disguised as religion and religious principles.
 
In such a culture, ignorance is prone to making its way and settling in, and it does so in the garb of religious or divine enlightenment. And what if a rational query is posited in contrast to their cultural ethics? Then, the juxtaposition is met with severe condemnation, and is eyed as blasphemy by the traditionalists.

When she tries to confide in her mother, that woman is strongly reprimanded and told that sexual urges and sex is just for a man and his pleasure. And if she tries to talk to her husband regarding this issue, he questions her character and fidelity to him

One social issue and cultural norm which seems to be deeply impacting is gender roles, where the masculine is deemed as the potent and master upon the feminine. Both of these genders suffer through misandry, according to this toxic, misogynistic approach, when the two genders are wired in the form of relations, we find the male gender gaining the upper hand, to the extent of granting him power and control over the female, including their life and even their very existence, e.g. his sister, his wife and his daughter. Furthermore, this ancient concept, which still infects the roots of these people, is defended by playing the religion card before the naïve, illiterate civilians. 

An example of this injustice can be seen at its climax in marital relationships, where gender roles are defined and a family is formed. The psychological patterns of people in such roles can be traced to the model presented by the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche in his book, 'The Genealogy of Morals'. In the book, Nietzsche presents the relation between the creditor and the debtor, and every act that the prior performs against the latter is justified due to the existence of the debt. To understand this further, one may also account for when another German philosopher, Karl Marx, demonstrated feudal systems, where the peasants were characterised as chattel property who 'belonged' to their lord, who in turn had sworn allegiance to a monarch. In one way or another, the facilitated party swears its utmost submission towards the facilitator with respect to the facility provided. In our particular scenario, the feminine gender swears her allegiance and, in a way, grants the masculine gender a unique power over her life and the choices to be made. This is implemented under specific societal and legal frameworks, i.e. when a family comes into being. For example, a woman (wife) cannot exit her house without permission from her metaphoric God. Similarly, a woman (wife) cannot undertake job - external employment, unless her husband consents to it. And a woman (wife, daughter or sister) cannot get an education without the express permission of her superior gender (husband, father or brother). And all of this is fully justified because the masculine gender is the facilitator in the house.

The aleuthergic, self-proclaimed religious declaration is then made further, that a woman's husband is her metaphoric God. Women are trained their entire lives to please their husbands, to compromise in every step of their lives, and to not complain, for he is the provider.
 
Now, when the same woman is tied in a marital bond (not forgetting who has guarded her virginity for the sake of her husband) and finds that her husband is an impudent man, then what? She has been 'fasting' her entire life, and now, she is expected to starve till her death without expressing the hunger that is consuming her whole. When she tries to confide in her mother, that woman is strongly reprimanded and told that sexual urges and sex is just for a man and his pleasure. And if she tries to talk to her husband regarding this issue, he questions her character and fidelity to him, calling her an ingrate woman, labelling her a mistress and a prostitute, and begins to disregard her identity. He starts by telling her that the fault is not in him but in the woman who does not let him do the deed.

Does taunting, screaming and denying end the natural urge and need in women? Is it biologically or psychologically possible for her to accommodate in such circumstances, deeming it natural?

The couple cannot even opt for counselling, for the misandry ego can affect the male's masculinity. Not to mention, if the other partner had faced such a problem, the male would be encouraged and urged to divorce or seek comfort in others.

Her husband is the lofty ceiling, who provides her with a roof and every facility, such as food, money, clothes, etc. The children add new rooms to this house. But something is lacking in this glorious building

Such culture deprives the woman, very barbarically, of her rights. Now, the only option left for her is to consult her religion, as previously mentioned, one of the two factors shaping Pakistani society.

When she dares to consult a religious cleric, he would advise her to seek divorce and marry someone, who can comfort her.

But is marriage all about coitus…? 

Women have families and children to whom they feel responsible and emotionally attached. If six out of every ten women who are dissatisfied remarry to satisfy their urges, what will then become of society, those children, and the next generation? And if she does not, is it fair to suffer silently, alone, with no acknowledgement, rather breed hatred and disgust for burning alone in agony?

The marriages of such women turn into big houses, where her wedding vows are now high walls that seem splendid and guard her against the world. Her husband is the lofty ceiling, who provides her with a roof and every facility, such as food, money, clothes, etc. The children add new rooms to this house. But something is lacking in this glorious building; there is no window or opening, depriving the woman of the warmth of the sun and air to breathe…Soon, she discovers she is trapped in a big, grey structure, with no oxygen to breathe, and no light to brighten it up. There is no difference between her house and a cold, dark grave. And everyone, who spectates from the outside, admires the grandeur of her house, remains deaf to her screams and blind to the true tale that unfolds hidden behind the four walls.

So, is it truly ethical and just in the eyes of man and God for one gender to suffer with no remedy or any compensation, while the other can do as it pleases? And if all of this was not sufficient, the other gender is to remain pleased, content and grateful. Does she not even have the right to express despair, anguish or sadness? It is as if one has been invited to a feast but is then presented with an empty tray by the host. Now, one is expected not only to hold one's patience but rather to express gratitude to the host for honouring one with such a delicious and outstanding meal.

Pakistan, a developing country, confines within its borders the untold anguish of countless mothers, daughters and sisters, who are tormented and deprived of their basic right and are not given the human right to call it their fundamental right. A country, in which this silent plague victimises many, the idea of a cure remains beyond comprehension, let alone consideration. 

The author is a BS English Literature student.